It's not required that you hire a programmer to design and implement eCRFs with this system. The training and customer service team is so incredibly helpful. I was able to turn around an entire study's EDC setup within 3 weeks of getting contracts signed.

Each time I've identified a pain point or a feature that I would like or wanted to work better, it was updated in the next release. I don't currently have any unmet needs.

Wonderful! I know that sounds short, but it really has been a system that I have grown to appreciate and enjoy working within. The tech support and staff at TrialKIt are also a primary reason for my choice to go with TrialKit. Working with TrialKit allows the versatility to have a solution for my clients where I can contour the system to meet their needs.

Answered in previous section with regards to system performance

The only improvement I would recommend is the add the capability to schedule jobs to automatically generate reports and send them to a sFTP.

Dealing with Clinical Studio and, by extension, the support staff has been a lesson in abject frustration. It is one of the most bug-filled, poorly written programs I have ever had to deal with. At this point though, I have poured hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars into setting up our data management within Clinical Studio, so it's essentially too late to switch to a competing EDC. No doubt many users are in a similar position to my own, allowing Clinical Studio to offer such a sub-par product with little to no repercussions.

At first I believed Clinical Studio was rather flexible and had lots of functionality. Unfortunately, the more I've used it, the more I've discovered that it is full of undocumented limitations (such as certain Conditional Logic types not working with certain Field types, for no clear reason) as well as hollow functionality (such as a button to copy and paste Conditional Logic from one Field to another Field in the TrialKit, though the button doesn't actually work).

The fact that most of the bugs and problems that I've run into with Clinical Studio are not new, yet are still not fixed, is infuriating. Often, when I contact support they tell me that they've seen the issue I'm describing in the past, and suggest a work-around for it. This "solution" only addresses the symptom, not the underlying problem (bugs in the developers' programming), and does nothing to prevent the issue from happening to myself or someone else in the future.

We've been able to tap into the world of mobile and wearable technology in clinical research!

Clinical Studio and TrialKit have helped FUEL Studios, Inc. provide even more great tools for our clients. The feature we like most about this platform is the native ability to run on Smartphones, Tablets, and Wearables as an App. It creates a fast and intuitive experience for sponsors, clinicians, and patients. The user interface is modern, and fun for users to use from any location. The Clinical Studio support team has been great to work with too! They have always supported our team in numerous ways, and eagerly receive our suggestions for software improvements. Good people. We're thrilled to have this platform as one of the solutions we can offer to our clients!

Though this platform has the ability to create reports and easily pull data, we're hoping to see the complexity of these features grow. For example, creating graphical reports or reports with calculations. We're also hoping we could easily query all study and system data to find specific situations. In the times when we need more, it is very easy to export data to work with outside reporting tools. Or, ask the support team for further information!

Overall, TrialKit is a great product. With it's ease of use, time from study start to go live is a smaller window of time than other software I have worked with. Customer Support is quick to respond with professional, personal care taken to address any issues I encounter throughout the life of my studies.

As a study builder, I have found TrialKit easy to use from study start up through archival. Form building, study visit schedule set-up and conditional action programming are fairly quick and user friendly. Also, if needed, online help information is concise and thorough. The process to go live, migrate to an updated version and lock/archive are simple to perform and navigate.

One feature that could use improvement is Report Builder. Currently, it is not robust enough to generate custom reports of data in the system. It is mostly a data dump and it would be nice to have some added features where the user could add logic to the reports to give the customer a better and more robust output of their data.